St. Mary's County schools hold first reading on AI use policy; public comment set for Jan. 21

St. Mary's County Public Schools opened a work session with a first reading of a draft policy titled "Adoption and Use of Artificial Intelligence," which would apply to students, employees, contractors and volunteers using AI on school devices, accounts, networks or in school-sponsored activities. The board set a public comment period for Jan. 21 and scheduled a second reading for Feb. 4.

Will Buckmaster, who presented the draft, said the policy is intended "to establish expectations for responsible, secure, and equitable use of AI," and includes definitions of AI, AI agents and generative AI as well as a requirement that the superintendent develop administrative regulations for tool approval, training, privacy and security controls. Buckmaster said the chief academic officer and the director of information technology (or their designees) would jointly oversee evaluation and implementation and that the policy would be reviewed at least every two years.

A staff presenter said the district reconstituted a steering committee during the 2024-25 school year and formed a multi-stakeholder work group of staff, teachers, principals and central-office personnel to assess classroom and operational uses of AI. That presenter said SMCPS previously updated its code of conduct and acceptable-use language to remove device-specific references and to incorporate AI-related language under plagiarism and acceptable-use provisions.

Board members and staff focused in discussion on implementation details. One board member asked whether students serve on the work group; staff said students were not yet included but that student involvement was planned for future iterations. Multiple speakers emphasized that the current draft concentrates first on supporting teachers and establishing a secure foundation before expanding student-facing uses.

Several board members voiced ethical and academic-integrity concerns. One board member argued teachers can often identify AI-enhanced work and urged parental partnership to define ethical use, stating, "If we tell you that we've run something through and there's a 98% possibility that it has been AI enhanced, it probably has been." Another board member described AI tools as helpful for efficiency but warned that rapidly generated responses "aren't going to help anybody develop critical thinking."

Presenters also stressed technical and privacy safeguards. The staff presenter described ongoing work on security controls to prevent unintentional data leaks or the inadvertent feeding of personally identifiable information into third-party models, and said the district is vetting tools but will not deploy them until privacy and contractual protections are in place.

The board took no formal action at the work session beyond the first reading. The district plans public comment on Jan. 21 and a second reading on Feb. 4, when the board will consider revisions informed by public input and administrative regulations.